Mitchell v. Tilghman
Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.
Status
More on how this was screened
The Supreme Court's 1881 decision rejected Mitchell's construction of Tilghman's process patent, and its 1888 opinion expressly described that ruling as an overruling. The confirmed treatment is listed below.
8 later cases cite Mitchell v. Tilghman; 8 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.
Relying on Mitchell v. Tilghman?
This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.
Treatments
Overruled
-
The Supreme Court held, contrary to Mitchell, that Tilghman's patent covered the process rather than only the particular mode described in the specification.
Tilghman v. Proctor · Supreme Court of the United States · filed
This case involves a consideration of the same patent which was the subject of litigation in the ease of Mitchell v. Tilghman, reported in 19th Wallace, 28-7. ... Upon the renewed consideration which has been given to the subject, the court is unanimously- of opinion, contrary to the decision in the Mitch/ell case, that the-patent of Tilghman must be sustained as a patent for a process, and- not merely for the particular mode -of applying and using the process pointed out in the specificar tidn
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →
Does this case still carry your argument?
Describe your facts. Ezel reads Mitchell v. Tilghman and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace